Comment by jrapdx3 | Hacker News Reader

Comment by jrapdx3 | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

It's different here since much of the construction is happening in areas that have been vacant. We have the Pearl district, Slabtown and others in which many new structures are going in. Even in downtown Portland, there are plans to build on street level parking lots, adding to the structure inventory. There is a real expansion going on in this region.

Population of Portland proper has actually grown substantially, >= 7% in the last 10 years or so. The entire metro area may have increased even more, I'm not sure about that. Portland State University maintains a demographic study center with the data but I didn't check there for this comment.

The necessity for constructing more housing units isn't questioned, but there's a lot of discussion about projects that the city planners allowed to exceed the originally planned height restrictions without the issue being open for community input. The lack of procedural transparency in these cases has evoked the ire of concerned citizens.

As far as neighborhoods go, close-in areas have experienced marked "gentrification", displacing lower income populations to the "high number" districts of east Portland where housing is less expensive. So indeed development has had substantial effects on some neighborhoods, whether that's "good" or "bad" can be debated, but it is a reality.

This PSU site may be of interest to anyone who's made it this far into the thread: http://neighborhoodpulsepdx.org/. It has some charts and maps that explore some of the data relating to population growth in the Portland area.

Edit: This is probably a better direct link: http://neighborhoodpulsepdx.org/portland21/growing-portland/...

"without the issue being open for community input"

Are you sure this is an accurate description? Many neighborhood groups will ignore opportunities for input, sometimes for years, so they can later block the project and retroactively claim they "weren't given a voice".

For example, when San Francisco put bus-only lanes on Mission Street a few months ago, neighborhood activists said:

"“SFMTA’s red carpet bombing of the Mission was a surprise attack and is wholly unwelcome,” Raeleen Valle-Brenes, an activist from the Cultural Action Network told the board."

Mike Schiraldi describes what really happened:

"Actually, the MTA took out multiple ads in 8 different local papers, notified 31 neighborhood and merchant groups, 8 schools, neighborhood senior centers, posted on Twitter and Facebook, rode the 14-Mission Bus to distribute 1500 postcards, handed out 1700 flyers, and mailed out more than 25,000 more postcards.

They also had these community meetings:

Public Open House #1 (2/18/15)

Mission Merchants Association (2/18/15)

Mission Bernal Merchants (3/9/15 & 3/27/15)

Calle 24 (3/10/15)

Mission High School Principal (3/12/15)

14 Mission Rider Open House @ 24th BART Plaza (3/25/15)

MEDA (4/16/15)

Public Open House #2 (4/21/15)

Public Open House #3 (5/30/15)

Public Hearing (10/16/15)

SFMTA Board of Directors meeting, with public comment (12/1/15)

Prior to all that, the Chronicle wrote about it in 2014: http://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/Muni-overhaul-spe...

And before that, they wrote about it in 2012: http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/S-F-transit-agency-s-p...

And that last article says they'd been trying to get this done since 2008."

(source: https://www.reddit.com/r/sanfrancisco/comments/4i5n66/critic...)

> "without the issue being open for community input"

> Are you sure this is an accurate description? Many neighborhood groups will ignore opportunities for input, sometimes for years, so they can later block the project and retroactively claim they "weren't given a voice".

I'm sure that's happened here though ATM I don't remember particular instances. What I had in mind are decisions being made by the city council or bureaucracies with little or no notice to the community. Portland has many active neighborhood associations that try to speak up on relevant issues, but their voices are often unheeded.

As an example, my neighborhood association recently succeeded in getting some attention from the city concerning traffic/safety issues. Without going into the gory details, the salient point is that the neighborhood had been trying for >15 years to work with the city to find a solution before something was done.

So that kind of history is more or less the inverse of the situation you described. IMO the lesson in both cases is that problems within a community aren't going to be solved unless all participants are willing to listen to, and work with each other.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com